5 ms·

Policing speech like that just breeds resentment. You not only guaranteed that these people later made the same comments to each other in private, but also inch

by fdsaaf 10y ago

Policing speech like that just breeds resentment. You not only guaranteed that these people later made the same comments to each other in private, but also inched a bit closer to resenting people like you and your entire cause. Mind your own business. You have no right to interfere in a conversation among friends, even one that triggers you. If you want to encourage change in the world, be the change and set an example. You're not going to change how people feel by suppressing expressions of those feelings. Not once in human history has this censorious approach actually worked. But it's created powder kegs plenty of times.

kbenson 10y ago
> you and your entire cause It's entirely possible his "cause" was polite interaction in social gatherings, with a specific focus on audience behavior and how not to ruin the experience for everyone around you. > Mind your own business. You have no right to interfere in a conversation among friends, even one that triggers you. When people are making public comments in a forum that is detracting from the reason people are assembled and you are there for that reason, it is your business.
DSMan195276 10y ago
That's just dumb. It would be one thing if they were having a quiet conversation among themselves whispering back and forth and were told to stop. But clearly OP could hear them, they weren't being quiet. And allowing such behavior to go on where people can clearly hear it is the same thing as condoning it. That's besides the fact that if you're going to act like that during a talk, you shouldn't be in the room anyway because you're being a distraction to everybody else.
- fdsaaf 10y ago
  > allowing such behavior to go on where people can clearly hear it is the same thing as condoning it Toleration is what allows people who have different views to work together toward common goals. You can't have civilization without it, because no two people will agree on everything. If these people were really as boorish as the OP described, the best approach would have been to let them embarrass themselves. What's next, hushing someone who dares admit he voted for a Republican? (I can imagine the rationale now: "you're enabling war and bigotry by proxy! Public GOPism is unacceptable!")
  - eropple 10y ago
    The paradox of intolerance has been largely derided since the 1940s, and for good reason. If you do not confront and quell threats to your community, they only ever fester. They don't go away, they get worse--see GamerGate and the rest of the reactionaries happily SWATting female academics and game developers in the name of "ethics in games journalism," and how that didn't magically appear when Adam Baldwin put a name on it (but the name legitimized them and let them act openly, for a time, before everyone else caught up). Allowing people to be sexist jerks (let's not dress it up as "boorish") doesn't just let them "embarrass" themselves, it creates an effect within a subculture that gives that activity preferential status because few people want to use their limited public credibility to counteract it--thereby over time letting sexist behavior become the expected norm of that subculture. That's not OK, and speaking up directly confronts the issue and prevents it from becoming a social norm, or becoming further entrenched because we live in a profoundly sexist society to begin with, in that subculture.
bllguo 10y ago
What? OF COURSE he has a right to interfere, he can say whatever he damn well pleases. Furthermore, all he said was to knock it off; you seem to imply he lectured them or something similar. He set an example by demonstrating their behavior was not socially acceptable.
- eropple 10y ago
  Yup. Where I come from, this is what leadership looks like. Create the community in which you want to live and work--and if it the community in which you want to live and work doesn't have sexist dudes ripping on people for the fun of it, then make sure that they don't.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
- johnbm 10y ago
  Criticizing a woman, even calling her a bitch, is not misogyny. Misogyny is hating women because they are women. What OP described is just heckling. And what OP did is white knighting, i.e. a man defending a woman, because she's a woman, in order to appear virtuous. Like posting about it on HackerNews.
  - throwanem 10y ago
    > What OP described is just heckling Nah, heckling takes volume. You don't heckle sotto voce for just your buddies to hear. You do it at the top of your lungs for everyone in the room to hear. Say what you like about heckling, it takes a certain degree of grit.
  - kbenson 10y ago
    No, what he did was reinforce what is acceptable social behavior in that situation. While the specifics of the situation may have spurred him to act quicker or in a case he wouldn't have, that's irrelevant. The behavior being called out is unacceptable no matter who is giving the talk. People did not attend the talk to hear people heckle the talker, there are other forums for that (stand-up, and there are some talks which might be more comical and some light heckling might be acceptable). Rude behavior was called out. It's rude regardless of the people in each position in this scenario.
    - johnbm 10y ago
      I seem to recall a similar inappropriate joke being called out. Something about dongles. Man, I hope when the big one hits, San Francisco falls into the sea, so all these guys can finally fulfil their fantasy of saving a m'lady like Leo Dicaprio in Titanic.
  - imron 10y ago
    > Criticizing a woman, even calling her a bitch, is not misogyny It might not be misogyny, but it sure says a lot about the person using such language.
jacalata 10y ago
How dare you police his speech by telling him he shouldn't have said anything.

by fdsaaf 10y ago

kbenson 10y ago

> you and your entire cause It's entirely possible his "cause" was polite interaction in social gatherings, with a specific focus on audience behavior and how not to ruin the experience for everyone around you. > Mind your own business. You have no right to interfere in a conversation among friends, even one that triggers you. When people are making public comments in a forum that is detracting from the reason people are assembled and you are there for that reason, it is your business.

DSMan195276 10y ago

That's just dumb. It would be one thing if they were having a quiet conversation among themselves whispering back and forth and were told to stop. But clearly OP could hear them, they weren't being quiet. And allowing such behavior to go on where people can clearly hear it is the same thing as condoning it. That's besides the fact that if you're going to act like that during a talk, you shouldn't be in the room anyway because you're being a distraction to everybody else.

fdsaaf 10y ago
> allowing such behavior to go on where people can clearly hear it is the same thing as condoning it Toleration is what allows people who have different views to work together toward common goals. You can't have civilization without it, because no two people will agree on everything. If these people were really as boorish as the OP described, the best approach would have been to let them embarrass themselves. What's next, hushing someone who dares admit he voted for a Republican? (I can imagine the rationale now: "you're enabling war and bigotry by proxy! Public GOPism is unacceptable!")
- eropple 10y ago
  The paradox of intolerance has been largely derided since the 1940s, and for good reason. If you do not confront and quell threats to your community, they only ever fester. They don't go away, they get worse--see GamerGate and the rest of the reactionaries happily SWATting female academics and game developers in the name of "ethics in games journalism," and how that didn't magically appear when Adam Baldwin put a name on it (but the name legitimized them and let them act openly, for a time, before everyone else caught up). Allowing people to be sexist jerks (let's not dress it up as "boorish") doesn't just let them "embarrass" themselves, it creates an effect within a subculture that gives that activity preferential status because few people want to use their limited public credibility to counteract it--thereby over time letting sexist behavior become the expected norm of that subculture. That's not OK, and speaking up directly confronts the issue and prevents it from becoming a social norm, or becoming further entrenched because we live in a profoundly sexist society to begin with, in that subculture.

bllguo 10y ago

What? OF COURSE he has a right to interfere, he can say whatever he damn well pleases. Furthermore, all he said was to knock it off; you seem to imply he lectured them or something similar. He set an example by demonstrating their behavior was not socially acceptable.

eropple 10y ago
Yup. Where I come from, this is what leadership looks like. Create the community in which you want to live and work--and if it the community in which you want to live and work doesn't have sexist dudes ripping on people for the fun of it, then make sure that they don't.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

johnbm 10y ago
Criticizing a woman, even calling her a bitch, is not misogyny. Misogyny is hating women because they are women. What OP described is just heckling. And what OP did is white knighting, i.e. a man defending a woman, because she's a woman, in order to appear virtuous. Like posting about it on HackerNews.
- throwanem 10y ago
  > What OP described is just heckling Nah, heckling takes volume. You don't heckle sotto voce for just your buddies to hear. You do it at the top of your lungs for everyone in the room to hear. Say what you like about heckling, it takes a certain degree of grit.
- kbenson 10y ago
  No, what he did was reinforce what is acceptable social behavior in that situation. While the specifics of the situation may have spurred him to act quicker or in a case he wouldn't have, that's irrelevant. The behavior being called out is unacceptable no matter who is giving the talk. People did not attend the talk to hear people heckle the talker, there are other forums for that (stand-up, and there are some talks which might be more comical and some light heckling might be acceptable). Rude behavior was called out. It's rude regardless of the people in each position in this scenario.
  - johnbm 10y ago
    I seem to recall a similar inappropriate joke being called out. Something about dongles. Man, I hope when the big one hits, San Francisco falls into the sea, so all these guys can finally fulfil their fantasy of saving a m'lady like Leo Dicaprio in Titanic.
- imron 10y ago
  > Criticizing a woman, even calling her a bitch, is not misogyny It might not be misogyny, but it sure says a lot about the person using such language.

jacalata 10y ago

How dare you police his speech by telling him he shouldn't have said anything.